4 ms·

Related question: What is the impact of IPv6 on regular users privacy?

by etaioinshrdlu 8y ago

Scarbutt 8y ago
The same as ipv4.
- DINKDINK 8y ago
  Use of NAT to cope with IPv4 issues has an unintended privacy benefit. IPv6 obviates NAT and the privacy benefits.
  - teddyh 8y ago
    But IPv6 also adds IPv6 privacy extensions (used by default by many systems).
CKN23-ARIN 8y ago
Less NAT means less household/workplace/etc-level traffic mixing means less plausible deniability for users.
- lokedhs 8y ago
  Address randomisation should give you the same level of deniability. The only part of your address that doesn't change is the same part that is unchanged in the IPv4 case. Unless you have CGNAT of course, but I don't think anyone would argue that that thing is a good thing to have.
  - tedunangst 8y ago
    A random address may make it harder to track individual devices over time, but if two sites see the same IPv6 it will be harder to argue that it's two different devices.
djsumdog 8y ago
In theory you can track individual devices in a household instead of grouping everyone in one house, small business, building, etc. as one IP. Currently, even with the limitations of IPv4, most trackers can use cookies and browser fingerprints (your browser's headers, fonts, etc.) to individually identify you even behind NAT. But with IPv6, ad engines could potentially identify that you're running two different browsers on the same laptop or device, and associate both of those browsers to _you_ (some type of single targeting profile). They also have a more precise way to track you without a browser fingerprint.
- corobo 8y ago
  This is likely why the GDPR considers IP addresses as personal data. Oddly enough it's always (in my experience) the tech types that have argued against IP addresses being personal, forgetting that we might one day switch to IPv6
- stephen_g 8y ago
  Note that 95% of people browsing with IPv6 are probably using SLAAC with privacy extensions, so all your devices IPs should be frequently changing (at least every day, but you can lower the timeout). Only the subnet would stay the same, similar to a NAT’ed IP.
  - spystath 8y ago
    As it's evident from NAT they can track even behind a single IPv4. As long they know your prefix the privacy extensions don't really help. Of course one could have a dynamic prefix similar to dynamic IPs residential ISPs use. It's funny, in the past a static IP was considered a valuable feature for a residential internet connection. Nowadays, I'm wondering if dynamic IPs are more viable from a privacy perspective.

Related question: What is the impact of IPv6 on regular users privacy?

Scarbutt 8y ago

The same as ipv4.

DINKDINK 8y ago
Use of NAT to cope with IPv4 issues has an unintended privacy benefit. IPv6 obviates NAT and the privacy benefits.
- teddyh 8y ago
  But IPv6 also adds IPv6 privacy extensions (used by default by many systems).

CKN23-ARIN 8y ago

Less NAT means less household/workplace/etc-level traffic mixing means less plausible deniability for users.

lokedhs 8y ago
Address randomisation should give you the same level of deniability. The only part of your address that doesn't change is the same part that is unchanged in the IPv4 case. Unless you have CGNAT of course, but I don't think anyone would argue that that thing is a good thing to have.
- tedunangst 8y ago
  A random address may make it harder to track individual devices over time, but if two sites see the same IPv6 it will be harder to argue that it's two different devices.

djsumdog 8y ago

In theory you can track individual devices in a household instead of grouping everyone in one house, small business, building, etc. as one IP. Currently, even with the limitations of IPv4, most trackers can use cookies and browser fingerprints (your browser's headers, fonts, etc.) to individually identify you even behind NAT. But with IPv6, ad engines could potentially identify that you're running two different browsers on the same laptop or device, and associate both of those browsers to _you_ (some type of single targeting profile). They also have a more precise way to track you without a browser fingerprint.

corobo 8y ago
This is likely why the GDPR considers IP addresses as personal data. Oddly enough it's always (in my experience) the tech types that have argued against IP addresses being personal, forgetting that we might one day switch to IPv6
stephen_g 8y ago
Note that 95% of people browsing with IPv6 are probably using SLAAC with privacy extensions, so all your devices IPs should be frequently changing (at least every day, but you can lower the timeout). Only the subnet would stay the same, similar to a NAT’ed IP.
- spystath 8y ago
  As it's evident from NAT they can track even behind a single IPv4. As long they know your prefix the privacy extensions don't really help. Of course one could have a dynamic prefix similar to dynamic IPs residential ISPs use. It's funny, in the past a static IP was considered a valuable feature for a residential internet connection. Nowadays, I'm wondering if dynamic IPs are more viable from a privacy perspective.